Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 12:53:27PM +0000, Greg Cope wrote:
> >Out of interest does the Netfilter  have a large / battery backed cache
> >to decrease the I/O / disk bottle neck ?
> 
> Yes.  They have a chunk of NVRAM which ACKs the write request as soon as it's
> committed there.  This gives it the ability to ack write messages very quickly
> while still ensuring that the data is resiliant to crashes.


So you are avoiding one big bottle neck - the disks.

Also sending one message will reduce the I/O required compared to n
messages.

> >Also does your system only send one message - the ones I deal with are
> >all individual (both in content and message headers).
> 
> That's the problem.  It's relatively slow throwing a bunch of messages
> into QMail.  It doesn't take a very powerful machine to completely swamp
> a fairly hefty QMail server, I've found.  And since the smtp daemons
> are fat, dumb, and happy individual processes, they don't really have the
> smarts to do any sort of throttling on incoming connections.
> 
> We ended up having to implement that sort of thing externally so that the
> originating program wouldn't swamp the box.

What about using tcpserver to limit the inbound connections - or even
move this to another box (if you can split the list like that).

I've used mutiple outbound boxes and a single inbound box to deal with
bounces etc ...

<snippage>

Greg 

> 
> Sean
> --
>  Laws are the source code to our government.  Submit a patch November 7.
>  VOTE!  November 7, 2000
> Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python


Reply via email to